Mr President, I know you've talked about reply, but in light of the language that was used, implying that the Prosecution is trying to mislead this tribunal, we do have a right to put a response on to the record. You will note that my objection was very clear. That there was no foundation to put it in through a witness which was a big issue, which has been a big issue in this case, at least in the Prosecution case. There are other means by which they can attempt to put it in. The rules do not go away because it is the accused testifying. It is not an attempt to mislead, but it certainly is an explication of our understanding of the requirements of the means by which evidence can be placed before your Honours. And in this instance, 89(C) through a witness and our suggestion is not sufficient foundation.